[r-t] Candidate definition #10a

[Iain Anderson]

Peter King wrote:

> Surely if there are 5040 rows then if we start with rounds 
> (row 0) and end in rounds (row 5040) then the number of 
> changes (which I like to think of as the spaces between the 
> rows) is also 5040. If you started on row 1 (for the sake of 
> argument 2135476) and ended with row 5040
> (rounds) then that would be 5039 changes - but 5040 rows. The 
> number of rows is the same as the number of changes because 
> we traditionally start from row 0 which is rounds - or am I 
> missing something?

You are correct in that we usually omit either row 0 or row 5040.  The issue
is that we don't have to omit either of them, or we are free to omit both.

Consider 5040 changes of major in the traditional sense, except that it
starts in queens and finishes in rounds.  The length is either 5041, 5040,
or 5039 depending on how we choose to keep or omit rows.  It would be nice
to have length well-defined so that two bands ringing the same compostion
didn't claim that the peal lengths differed by 2 rows.

Also, if the composition contained both queens and rounds in the middle, you
would need to exclude both ends.  Compare that to the case where you were
ringing a very false royal method, you may need to count both ends just to
get the length to be 5000.  Right now there is a little ambiguity that just
needs resolving if we want the definition to be solid.